HOSPITAL POLICY

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 122, 25 May 1928, Page 10

HOSPITAL POLICY

.• ♦ WHAT DID DOCTORS SAY ? PAiIIKKSTON. NORTH DISPUTE , ' (By Telegraph.) (Special to "The Evening Post.") . PALMERSTONN:, This Day. Discussion on. Hdspital Board policy and administration in Paloierston North threatens to move away from the broad issues to a debate, as to,,what the doctors did or did not say about the £18,000 building programme contemplated by the board. At Monday's ■ meeting of the Borough Council ■ Councillor M. A. Eliott reinforced his-criticism of the scheme by quoting the honorary medical-staff as being against it. To this Sir James Wilson replied with a bulletin issued from the board's executive (and published in yesterday's "Post") declaring that the medical staff repudiated Councillor Eliott, who-had, they said, no authority from any of them to make any statement regarding the board's building policy... ; , „, ; ; ... ... ■ . : Councillor iEliptt-now. returns to. the attack in a, statement, in which he says:— ."About ten days ago 11,I1, was present during a discussion at which there were two members .of, the- honorary medical staff and. two, other well-known .doctors, t The Hospital Board, was the subject of the conversation. The two members of the staff were most'emphatic, in their condemnation of the expenditure and general policy of the board. ' It was at their instigation'! backed up by the remarks of all those present, that I made the statements at the last meeting of.the Borough Council.. Lasted'the two members of the medical staff if I could. make use of the statements, and the reply" was, 'Yes, but do not mention.our names.' . "Therefore, without consent of these two gentlemen, I will'not publish their names. Nevertheless, my: statements are correct, and at least one of-the doctors referred to informs me that he prepared, if necessary, to publish a corroboration. "I' am' informed by a member of the medical staff that a meeting of the staff was held'on' Monday last, at which a certain resolution . was carried. This resolution was in two parts. The first was 'That the medical staff as a body neither approve nor disapprove of the'statements made by Councillor Eliott, because, as a | body, they had: not been consulted.' The second part of the. resolution was 'that the medical, staff reaffirm the report that they had previously sent to the DirectorGeneral of Hospitals.' This report in effect was that they considered a large part of. the building programme was unnecessary. . . ■ "A' meeting- of the executive of the Hospital Board was called for Tuesday, at 'which the medical staff were requested to attend. A typewritten copy of the above resolution carried> by the medical staffs was handed to the chairman of the board for publication.... Sir James Wilson said, 'I presume you will agree to the second half of your' resolution' being deleted?' A member of the medical staff said: 'No, the whole,resolution should be published or none.' • •" "The medical staff were then informed that they .were-at liberty to retire aud they left the room under the full impression that the resolution as carried by them and handed: to the board would be the one published. "What was the result? Because the medical staff refused to alter their resolution at the request of the: board, this so displeased: them that the resolution was suppressed altogether, and in lieu thereof a garbled and .entirely misleading report was substituted and handed the Press for publication." ■ . ,